Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (176466)	1/10/2004 2:08:02 PM
From: BWAC	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

<although less than the approximately $30 billion the federal government currently spends on agriculture subsidies, which he criticized as an investment ``in the industries of the 19th century.> Yeah, who needs food anyway. Of course I guess most of it goes to tobacco.

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (176466)	1/12/2004 10:39:03 AM
From: Amy J	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 186894

Hi Lizzie, RE: "1000 was borderline?! The border to oblivion you mean! That jobs report was horrible." You're funny, yeah, but things aren't actually that bad, at least not in our industry. Must be some other industry that's stumbling? We'll find out this week when the Dec numbers come out. There are 3 foreign countries experiencing some tightening on the labor pool at the high-end. Started feeling this about a month or two ago overseas. This will come here - probably see a pick up in labor here in the Valley in a quarter, if not sooner. Wonder which industry was responsible for the unexpected miss of 150,000 new jobs? Don't think it was ours. Doesn't feel like it anyway. The code orange probably put a lot of hiring plans on hold. By the way, you should really start looking at China's unemployment figures to get the read on unemployment in our industry. I find China's figures more useful than ours here - that link I gave you. Our analysts here haven't caught up to the fact they need to report global numbers not just USA unemployment numbers. And they'll have to sift through the numbers to figure out which of the 1M pool is applicable to our industry and talented enough for hire (currently, not many.) RE: "What I don't like is the fact that they are decimating R&D here to do it, and for no reason. They should grow here, and there, with each division serving the respective markets." Heavens, if they did that, then Intel would have to lay off 70% of its employees and move their operations overseas - They can't and aren't going to do that. I don't think you realize how hard Intel is working with the government to keep itself competitively in the USA. They could simply do what your fav dbase is doing - see what I mean? Btw, haven't heard any complaints about them in awhile, a couple of years ago was the last time I heard this one complaint over and over, so maybe things are improving over there. RE: " The cost angle is a bit of a smokescreen." Cost is an issue for mature stuff, not for new stuff. So just need more new stuff. So the issue for this country is we need to make more innovation, to justify the higher pay. This has been our country's formula for eternity - nothing has changed here. RE: "Bush said "tech was not a priority" early on in his term, and the budget went entirely to old industries like cotton bras." Maybe one of these years, we'll have a female US President that can actually think with the right anatomical part and get beyond the bras. This is getting really old. I'm feeling disappointed because some of communications business is merging with consumer comms (which I knew it would, and is fine from a business standpoint) but on a personal level, just wasn't expecting to see a slimey visual slap in the face in the shape of sleazy shows from the consumer sector. Thought hightech would always position itself as intelligent even in the consumer market, like MSFT etc. tends to do. Women always have to move up stream it seems to smarter land. Regards, Amy J